Gregory Hadley Nagaoka National College of Technology

RETURNING FULL CIRCLE: A SURVEY OF EFL SYLLABUS DESIGNS FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM

Gregory Hadley Nagaoka National College of Technology Japan Abstract of the ELT academic community away from the concerns of second language syllabi designs found in CLT or Task-based learning, there are questions among many as to what form the current paradigm shift will take as we approach the next century This paper As the

linguistic

continues to

attention

move

several of the issues currently surrounding today’s language syllabus designs, and offers a forecast of language syllabus designs expected to nse and fall in the years to come. It is felt that, by reviewing where we have been, important clues may be found as to where we may be going in the next few years as an academic community. reviews

second

Introduction As we approach the start of the 21 st century, English language teaching (ELT) is experiencing a significant paradigm shift A pnmary

for this stems from the decline m recent years of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) Startmg as early as the 1980’s, some began to question the relevance of CLT for second language learning (Swan 1985) Today the rate of CLT’s disintegration has reached the point to where it has become increasingly marginalized reason

50 Downloaded from http://rel.sagepub.com by guest on September 3, 2008 © 1998 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.

by linguists and influential second language educators. Jennings and Doyle z 169) state that CLT as an approach has been the platform for &dquo; unpnncipled eclecticism, varying from teacher to teacher &dquo; Shortall (1996) points out that so many approaches have been labelled as &dquo;commumcatme&dquo;, it has become impossible to define what Communicative Language Teachmg actually means Skehan (1996:30) maintains that CLT’s emphasis of verbal fluency over formal accuracy runs the risk of learners becoming confined to the strategic solutions they develop, without sufficient focus for structural change or accuracy&dquo;, and Batstone (1995) warns that CLT’s unbalanced approach to language teaching may lead to the early fossilization of learners’ language skills .. .

.

Language teachers can be forgiven for feeling betrayed by an ELT establishment which, just a few years ago, vigorously supported CLT. Sheen (1994 127) reflects the sentiment of many when he have not resulted m writes, frequent paradigm shifts &dquo;

progress m language learnmg &dquo; Others though (Richard1988, Bowen, Madsen and Hilferty 1985, Widdowson 1979) see

significant Amato

,

paradigm shifts as necessary for minimizing the extremes and building What is upon the strengths of innovative second language syllabi unique about the current paradigm shift however is that no new syllabus design, not even the Task-Based syllabus, has effectively The result has been several years of intense soulreplaced CLT searchmg on the part of teachers as they seek to redefine their roles as language educators (Nunan and Lamb 1996, Richards and Lockhart 1994) 1.1

Objectives

In the interim period between the decline of CLT and the rise of other syllabi on the honzon, it is an opportune time for language teachers to reconsider the nature of syllabus design for ELT. This paper considers several of the issues currently surroundmg today’s second language syllabus designs, and offers a forecast of language


to rise and fall in the years to come By where we have been, important clues may be found as to reviewing where we may be going as an academic community. We will begm first by defining some important terms and concepts.

syllabus designs expected

1.2 Definitions concernmg the distmction between the syllabus. Part of the confusion stems from the North Amencan understandmg of the term curriculum, which is often used interchangeably with syllabus Both are used in North America to mean a teacher’s requirements for a particular course Nunan (1993 8) as concerned with the planning, defines curriculum &dquo; implementation, evaluation, management, and administration of education programs.&dquo; This definition finds general acceptance among many applied linguists (cf. Stem, 1992 20, and Richards, Platt and

Questions often

arise

terms curriculum and

Weber, 1985) The term syllabus has been a much more difficult concept to define For example, Widdowson interprets a syllabus as the specification of a teachmg programme or pedagogic agenda which defines a particular subject for a a syllabus specification, particular group of learners is concerned with both the selection and the ordenng then, of what is to be taught

z 127)

(1993’8) sees a syllabus as a process that &dquo; focus[es] narrowly on the selection of gradmg and content &dquo; Candlm (1984) defines a syllabus as a means for encouragmg learners to challenge the pedagogic ideologies and views of reality that the syllabus designer bnngs to the class Yalden feels that a syllabus Nunan

more

...

replaces

the concept of

now seen as an

mstrument

’method’, and the syllabus is by which the teacher, with the


of the syllabus designer, can achieve a degree of ’fit’ between the needs and aims of the learner (as social bemg and as individual) and the activities which will take place in the classroom (1983:14)

help

Brumfit (1984 75) defines a syllabus as a document of administrative convemence and will only be partly justified on theoretical grounds and so is negotiable and adjustable.&dquo; Richards, Platt and Weber (1985:289) describe a syllabus which is organised around tasks, rather than m terms of grammar or vocabulary.&dquo; Long and Crookes (1993 9-10) state that a syllabus will designate

the elements of the target language they present to their words, structures, notions, etc - and how they the type of syllabus choice will should be presented have a pervasive influence on decisions m other areas, while the converse is not necessanly true. .

students -

My position is that a syllabus represents and endorses the adherence to some set of sociolinguistic beliefs regarding power, education and cognition. It is a political manifesto because it reveals the designers’ views on authority and status In one manner or another, cooperation is encouraged through receiving some sort of benefit (good grades, encouragement, cross-cultural discoveries, etc ), while restrictions await those who are out of sync (denial of credentials, reduced job opportunities, limited knowledge of those outside one’s language group, etc ) Syllabus as a concept is also a philosophical statement about learnmg and cognition Certam methods for teachmg and learnmg will be upheld as beneficial, based upon the syllabus designers’ beliefs about how people thmk and leam Partly because it is not as observable as a curriculum or class, the term syllabus is more abstract than is commonly supposed Nevertheless, the mfluence of a


particular syllabus design is extensive from the parameters set by the syllabus time when learners are encouraged

The curriculum will emanate The class will be a moment in to center on the educational elements defined m the cumculum The educational focus, selection of matenals and manner of presentation are all supported by an implicit philosophical nexus by which reality is organized

Figure One 2.

A

Survey of Second Language Syllabus Types

Long and Crookes (1993:10) have noted the of syllabus types that are presently available to

astoundmg diversity us:

communicative,

content-based, functional, lexical, notional, procedural, process, situational, skills, structural, task-based, topical, and several hybrid syllabi, such as Yalden’s proportional syllabus (Yalden 1987 120-137) It would take considerable time to point out the strengths and weaknesses of every language syllabus design Fortunately for our purposes, this will not be necessary.


White two

(1988 44-47) explains that all

current

syllabi fall

under

categones, which he calls Type A and Type B syllabi. Type A

syllabi deal with what should be learned m a second language classroom The emphasis is upon subject and content Course objectives are determined weeks ahead of the class The teacher is the authonty and mam resource person for the students. The teacher decides what items the students must master and how they will be evaluated What is done m class is external to the learner and mterventiomst. In other words, thmgs are done to the learner

Type B syllabi consider the question of how a second language The emphasis is upon the learnmg process. should be learned Objectives are decided dunng the course and are based upon the needs of the learners The teacher and students work together with the study focus and testmg format negotiable What happens m class is internal to the learner Thmgs are done with the learner White categonzes content or skills-based syllabi as type A and methods-based syllabi as type B. Wilkins (1976) separates language syllabi into synthetic and analytic categones. Synthetic syllabi teach

different parts of language [which] are taught separately and step by step so that acqwsition is a process of gradual accumulation of parts until the whole structure has been built up At any one time the learner is being exposed to a deliberately limited sample of language (1976.2). ..

Analytic syllabi operate m

terms of the purposes for which

people

are

learning

language and the kmds of language performance that necessary to meet those purposes (Wilkins 1976:13) It

can

be concluded that

analytic syllabi,

so to

speak,

are

look at the


forest, while synthetic syllabi look at the trees Long and Crookes (1993 1 1-12) carry through with Wilkins’ syllabus types to identify structural, lexical, notional, functional, and most situational and topical syllabuses [as] synthetic,&dquo; and, procedural, process and task syllabuses [as] examples of the analytic syllabus type &dquo; Wilkins (1976 1-2) descnbed analytic and synthetic syllabi as proportional

Syllabi that bolster second language analytic or synthetic m nature

curricula

are never

completely

While these theones on the nature of syllabus design are usually dealt with separately, they are equally helpful and should as such be viewed rather as an organic unit The total relationship of White, Wilkins and Long & Crookes’ ideas is shown in Figure Two

Figure Two


observed that the strongest form of a Type A Synthetic Syllabus form and structure, while a process approach highlighting learner autonomy is the most extreme version of a Type B Analytic Syllabus It focuses

is

on

2.1 Relative

Strengths and Weaknesses of Basic Syllabus

Designs Due to the complexity of teachmg a foreign language, any syllabus design will have its share of strengths and weaknesses The Type A synthetic syllabus approach is powerful m the mmds of many educational policymakers, publishers and teachers who have little time to innovate Type A synthetic syllabi are readily available to teachers. Most publishers produce volumes of textbooks and matenals for them Many teachers like this syllabus design because it is logical, organized and can provide a measure of accountability with the school admmistration Testmg is easy with Type A syllabi Students often seem to accept the approach of this design, mostly because it is used m other academic disciplmes outside TEFL It is reassunng for students because they can know to a greater degree what will be expected to memonze Language can be broken down into comprehensible bits so students will not be overwhelmed by the enormity of the target language Perhaps the mam argument for Type A synthetic syllabi is the belief that a focus on accuracy will lead to fluency

However, some SLA research findmgs tend to suggest that learnmg is successful when the students are actively engaged m usmg the language rather than m simply dissecting it into functions, notions, topics or descriptive grammar White explams more

the evidence from SLA research throws considerable doubt on traditional justifications for Type A syllabuses The general tenor of such research findings is that it is methodology rather than organization which may hold the key to successful language teachmg - and learnmg

’

.

’

’ ’

(1888110)


Almost every applied linguist takes joy in pokmg holes m Type synthetic syllabi Long and Crookes (1993.27) conclude that while Type A synthetic syllabi help students to master certam isolated forms, they are left unable to put this mastery into practice outside the classroom Actual language is different, and simplifying the language into small bits or items merely distorts it They also point out that what is taught m class is not necessanly learned by students A main in A is that is linear assumption Type synthetic syllabi learnmg process But Willis (1995) is quick to point out A

All that we know about the way people learn languages may not be a great deal, but we know how people don’t learn languages, and they don’t learn them like that they don’t learn them by addmg on one little bit at a time

Approachmg second language teaching synthetically can be likened to the person who takes apart a clock to study each piece, only to find out later that it cannot be put back together agam Will is (1995) contmues

It is

one [bit] and say, ’This You may do it for the purposes of syllabus specification, but it is a very artificial exercise, because [language] only has meanmg when m relation with other ’items’ is

actually impossible to separate

an

item’

Willis nghtly mamtams that Type A syllabi actually focus less on accuracy and more on conformity to the structure of language (and to the teacher) The curriculum that emerges from such a syllabus design will require students to prove their obedience to the mstitution through test performance The issue of conformity may bnng us closer to the reason why Type A synthetic syllabi contmue to be the modus operandi across Asia. Such an approach may fit closer with the internal syllabus and philosophical nexus of influential educators, and, ultimately, the

society.


Type B analytic syllabi, on the other hand, take the concerns of the learners into deeper consideration and seem more focused upon the busmess of learning rather than teaching Candlm (1984 36) feels that empowenng students to become involved m the leaming process has the potential of making a class mtnnsically motivating smce the students would have the chance to study accordmg to their interests. Type B syllabi take different learnmg styles, rates of second language comprehension and cognitive development into consideration Often they seek to somehow merge these factors together durmg the course of study To use the analogy of a journey, Type A synthetic syllabi are similar to a package tour with the teacher as tour guide Type B analytic syllabi are closer to a trip m which a group of fnends who decide on a daily basis where they would like to go and what they would like to do White illustrates Indeed, it is likely that most teachers, if asked to compare mitial plans with eventual outcomes, would acknowledge that what they and their students actually did dunng the course of a year did not exactly match what they thought they would do Inevitably, there is a process of give and take (or negotiation) which determmes the eventual journey and possibly even the destination Candlm’s proposal is, in to build this process of negotiation into the system rather than to ignore it (1988:97)

part,

Some SLA researchers suggest that Type B analytic syllabi appear more compatible with many language learners’ internal syllabi (Bailey 1980, Bailey et al 1974). Learners tend to be more concerned with comprehension than with grammatical accuracy. Prabhu asserts that Type B syllabi meet the needs of learners by concentratmg on meanmg over form:


... it was decided that teaching should consequently be concerned with creatmg conditions for coping with meanmg m the classroom, to the exclusion of any deliberate regulation of the development of grammatical competence or a mere simulation of language behavior

,

(19872) Yet while many researchers praise the potential of Type B syllabi, few openly advocate its use Kouraogo (1987) points out that m actual language classrooms Type B analytic syllabi’s focus on meaning and fluency tend to cause language learners metalanguage to petrify too soon Nunan (1993 44) asserts that Type B syllabi do not attempt to bnng the learnmg processes to any satisfying result At least for the Japanese ELT context, doubts about the Type B may be warranted Gnffee (1995) descnbed his expenment with process and procedural syllabi at SeIgakum University. After decidedly mixed results, he concluded that Japanese students lack the expenence to generate their own goals and objectives for a class

syllabus

In real life, 19-year-old Japanese university students can and do decide what they want and take concrete measures to achieve their goals as witness the proliferation of expensive ski equipment and frequent ski tnps However, when it comes to English language learning strategies which are required to be stated m an abstract, foreign metalanguage, students have less trammg, less expenence, and perhaps less desire (Gnffee 1995 17)

Hadley (1998) also reports problems with using Type B syllabi experimented with a leamer-centered, process syllabus for over two years at Japan’s Niigata University Two-thirds of the classes m the study suffered a significant loss of class time while students came He

to a consensus. The result was a series of unfocused

lessons, students


chatting m Japanese and a number of absences While one class m the study was very successful in terms of forming clearly defined goals, focused lessons, high attendance, enthusiastic learnmg and greater time spent usmg English, it developed a dark side The rest of the class ostracized students who passively refused to participate, and peer pressure eventually caused one to angrily drop out of the course attempting

to wile away the time

disturbmgly high

White warns that abdicating control of the course to immature, unmotivated learners creates the nsk of a non-learnmg expenence - an EFL class that is aimless and unsatisfying for everyone involved There

little point

substitutmg a pedagogical magical mystery reasonably well-defined educational destmation and such a warnmg may need to be kept m mind when replacmg prescription by negotiation (1988~ 102) is

tour for

m

a

can be seen that any syllabus design, if taken to extremes, will unique set of strengths and weaknesses Whatever position language teachers take, they will need to accept the pedagogic consequences of their decision Most language teachers will take probably opt for White’s position

It

have

a

In the end, a hybnd syllabus will probably result, not simply because of theoretical considerations, but because, m the dayto-day world of teachmg, this will be the compromise which satisfies most interest groups, and I personally would find it difficult to argue against such a pragmatic solution

(1988:111) an eclectic approach is not only the best available choice smce variety is the spice of language.&dquo; Ultimately an eclectic approach to syllabus design is probably the most logical, but only if it is an informed choice One cannot use the term &dquo;eclectic&dquo; as a pretty fa~ade for unprofessionalism.

Martm

common

(1997 4) adds that

sense, it

is


Future Trends in EFL

3

Syllabus Designs

In terms of syllabus design, the EFL academic community periodically sways from one extreme to another Before the 1970’s, structural syllabi based upon grammatical form were prevalant throughout the world Gradually, a move took place away from structural syllabi towards a focus on the communicative aspects of the language and on

learner autonomy

This

arguably reached

its climax

m

the

early

1990’s

Now that it appears that the

pendulum is swingmg back towards a focus on form and structure, some of the syllabus designs that are presently receiving attention may be destined to fade in the

near

future, while others

are

expected to increase m prestige 3.1

Taking Task to Task

attention has been devoted to the Task-Based with an syllabus, impressive corpus of literature to support the claim of its potential for second language learnmg (cf Nunan 1993, Long and Crookes 1993, Gatbonton and Gu 1994) However, the problems with the task-based syllabus in its current form are the same as those in CLT. a difficulty to define task, unbndled eclecticism, and the nsk of interlingual fossilization

At

present, considerable

anse as to how to best define the &dquo;task&dquo; in task-based Kumaravadmelu’s (1993) literature survey of over thirteen scholarly books and articles revealed that none could agree on the best way to define a task He concludes that

Questions

learnmg

..

task

remams

an

entity that defies clear terminological,

conceptual methodological understandmg because of the indiscnmmate, nondescnpt use of the term A close readmg of the current literature on task-based pedagogy makes it difficult to determine a set of governing principles or even defining criteria commonly shared by all (pg 69). and


It is this difficulty in defining the nature of task-based learnmg that has contributed to a large number of approaches bemg labeled as &dquo;task-based Chaudron’s (1988) research of task-based studies shows there has been such a broad understandmg of what was understood as a task by classroom teachers that until a greater consensus is formed on what makes up task-based learnmg, it will be difficult to make any claims as to its effectiveness &dquo;

In some cases, what is normally called task-based appears actually to be a collection of controlled fluency exercises taken from the NotionalFunctional syllabus and Communicative Language Teachmg (see, for example, see Nunan’s (1995) Atlas textbook senes) While such an approach may promote a certam level of fluency, there is always the risk that an overemphasis on fluency will allow students to rely on lexical chunks for the majority of their communication, without really progressmg m their second language ability Skehan warns

The central problem for the foreign language leamer, taught by task-based means, is that learners operate under the pressure of These time and under the need to get meanings across strategies provide an effective incentive for learners to make the best use of the language they already have But they do not encourage a focus on form They do not provide an incentive for structural change towards an interlanguage system with greater complexity The advantages of such an approach are greater fluency and the capacity to solve communication problems But these advantages may be bought at too high a pnce if it compromises continued language growth and interlanguage

development (1993 22) tend to support the view that Task-Based Learnmg has with the pedagogic concerns of the presently declmmg paradigm m ELT If they are not effectively dealt with, it is believed that the Task-Based Methodology will rapidly declme sometime early m the next These

issues

more in common

century


3.2 The Return to Form ,

,

Perhaps as a response to these weaknesses, m recent years there has been a discemable drift toward remtroducmg form and topicality back into second language learnmg For beginning learners, many have expressed a renewed interest m Pedagogic Grammar (PG) YamamotoWilson’s (1997 6) view is one that is receiving growing support within the ELT academic community really necessary to reject a grammatical approach m order to espouse a communicative one? Isn’t there a need for a more rounded approach, giving students a grounding m language structure at the same time as developmg their communicative competence? Is it

calling neither for a return to the bad old nor for a return to a grammar-translation is currently contemplated is some sort of middle the product and process approaches to teachmg Most of them mvolve some form of Computer Assisted grammar Language Learning (CALL), which has already enhanced the use of interactive multimedia packages and e-mail m some countnes (Bauman 1998, Wakao and Nelson 1997) Also related to this are significant developments in the area of corpus linguistics that have given birth to Data-Dnven Learnmg (Johns 1994) &dquo;Data-Dnven&dquo; means that discoveries made from computer analysis of text suggest the direction for teaching and learnmg Usmg a computer program called a concordancer, teachers and learners can study large text files of books, articles and transcripts of spoken data This data, which is called a corpus or corpora, is often quite large - rangmg from 10 million to up to 250 million words The advantage this has for students and teachers is that they can study authentic language as it actually occurs. A major weakness of earlier syllabus designs is they often presented an idealized language forms that were rarely, if ever, found outside the classroom The work presently underway m corpus linguistics Proponents for PG

days of structural approach What ground between

are

grammars,


suggests that hard data

can supplement human msight The computer thmk for us, but it can present the regular patterns that anse m the language, thus providing new avenues of discovery for students

cannot

There is a growmg number of published reports on how DDL is fueling the current need among language teachers for authentic grammatical examples (Aston 1995, Flowerdew 1996, Munson-Bowie 1996) Because of the newness of this approach, however, little work has been done on how to use corpora with beginners Neither have there been any suggestions yet as to how to make DDL flexible for the needs of students and teachers m countnes with disparate levels of technology Time will tell if DDL will receive greater acceptance and add greater validity to new structural syllabi Nevertheless this is a movement m ELT m which we are certam to see continued progress If the recent

in Japan are any indication of what is discussed elsewhere, there have been increasmg calls for the creation of content courses that teach other subjects (such as math, science, or social studies) m English Variations on the theme of content courses are bemg formed in colleges and universities across Japan Schools that are not yet prepared to completely switch over to English as the main medium of instruction are still forming new courses that have been proposed by a plethora of Special Interest Groups These promote topics such as global awareness, gender issues, or cross-cultural understandmg (Beebe 1998, Cates 1997) Much of the curriculum reform currently underway in Japanese umversities follows the worldwide trend of spendmg less time learnmg about English and spend more time learnmg m English The syllabus design behmd these curricula reforms appears to be Topical, Situational or Content-Based in nature Explicit language learning at these schools is beginning to take a secondary role to the transfer of information As one curriculum the mam objective is to help students developer in Japan writes, master content material Language leammg is incidental&dquo; (Poulshock

being attempted

developments

or

&dquo;

.

1995.9).


4

Conclusion

only is change a constant in ELT, it is also cyclical Soon beginning of next century, it is expected that the dominant ELT syllabus designs will have returned full circle We will likely see a continued shift away from analytic, learner-based or skill-based syllabi m favor of synthetic content-based syllabi The populanty of syllabi such as CLT and Task-Based Leaming is anticipated to declme while interest in lexical, structurally based syllabi will flourish Language classes will also see a greater emphasis on the topical, ideological concerns of curriculum planners As curricula m vanous educational institutions begin to reflect these changes, some teachers may be challenged to rethink their assumptions about language Not

after the

as always, make eclectic decisions based upon the real life needs of their students

learnmg, and

References

>

Aston, G (1995) Corpora in language pedagogy Matching theory and practice in G Cook and B Seidlhofer (Eds ), Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honour of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 257-270), Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bailey, K, Madden, C, and Krashen, S (1974) Is there a "natural sequence" in adult second language learning? Language Learning, 24, 235-43

Bailey, K M (1980) An introspective analysis of an individual’s language learning experience In R Scarcella and S D Krashen (Eds ), Research in Second Language Acquisition (pp 58-65) Rowley, MA Newbury House Product and process: Grammar in the second classroom. In M. Bygate, A Tonkyn, and E. Williams,

Batstone, R (1995)

language


(Eds ), Grammar and

the

Language Teacher (pp 224-236)

London Prentice Hall

Bauman, J (1998) Using e-mail with your students. The Language Teacher 22 (2), pp 11-15 as a foreign language A problem of knowledge and choice The Language Teacher 22 (5),

Beebe, J (1998) Sexist language and English 7-10

Bowen,J D, Madsen, H and Hilferty, A (1985) TESOL. Techniques and Procedures. Singapore Newbury House Publishers Brumfit, C J (1984a) Function and

structure of a state school syllabus for learners of second or foreign languages with heterogeneous needs ELT Documents, 118 , 75-82.

Candlin, C (1984) Syllabus design as a critical process In CJ Brumfit, (ed ), General English Syllabus Design (pp 29-45) Oxford Pergamon Press

Cates, K. (1997) New trends in global issues and English teaching Language Teacher 21 (5), pp 39-41

The

Chaudron, C (1988) Second Langliage Classrooms: Research on Teaching and Learning . New York Cambridge University Press. Flowerdew, J (1996) Concordancing in language learning In M. Pennmgton (Ed.), The Power of CALL (pp 97-113), Houston, Texas Athelstan

Griffee, D (1995) Student generated goals and objectives in a learnercentered classroom The Language Teacher 19 (2), pp 14-17


Gatbonton, E and Gu, G (1994) Preparing and implementing a Taskbased ESL curriculum in an EFL setting Implications for theory and practice TESL Canada Journal 11 (2), 9-29.

Hadley, G (1998) Examining the underlying principles of syllabus design Bulletin of Keiwa College, 6 , 211-228

EFL

T (1996) Curriculum innovation, teamwork, and the management of change In J Willis and D Willis (Eds.),

Jennings, K, & Doyle,

Challenge

and

Change

Language Teaching (pp. 169-177)

in

Oxford Hememann

Johns, J (1994) From printout to handout Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of Data-driven Learning In T Odlin (Ed), Approaches to Pedagogic Grammar (pp 293-313), New York Cambridge University Press

Kouraogo

P

(1987)

circumstances

EFL curriculum renewal and INSET 171-8

in

difficult

ELT Journal 41 pp (3),

Kumaravadivelu, B (1993) The name of the task and the task of naming Methodological aspects of task-based pedagogy In G Crookes and S M Gass (Eds.), Tasks in a Pedagogic Context: Integrating Theory and Practice (pp. 69-96) Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters Long,

M and

Units of analysis for syllabus design for task In G Crookes and S M. Gass (Eds ), Tasks in a Pedagogic Context: Integrating Theory and Practice (pp. 9-54) Philadelphia Multilingual Matters -

the

Crookes, G. (1993).

case

D (1997) How to Teaching Ideas 2 (4), p

Martin,

be 4

an

effective EFL teacher Language


Murrison-Bowie, S (1996). Linguistic corpora and language teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 16, pp 182-199. Nunan, D. (1995). Atlas: Learning-centered

. communication

Boston

Heinle & Heinle Publishers

Nunan,

D.

(1993). Syllabus Design Oxford University Press.

Nunan, D. (1993). Task-based syllabus design Selecting, grading and sequencing tasks In G Crookes and S M Gass (Eds.), Tasks in a Pedagogic Context: Integrating Theory and Practice (pp. 55-68) Philadelphia Multilingual Matters

Nunan, D. and Lamb, C (1996) The Self Directed Teacher: Managing the

Learning Process. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Poulshock, J W. (1996) English language and Christian academics and Christian the World, 6, pp 1-19

N S (1987) Second Language New York Oxford University Press

Prabhu,

Richards-Amato,

P

(1988) Making

content instruction for

language teachers

it

second language classroom. White

Pedagogy:

A

Christ and

Perspective.

happen: Interaction Plains, NY Longman

in

the

Richards J. and

Lockhart, C. (1994) Reflective Teaching in Second Language classrooms. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J., Platt, T., and Weber, H (1985) A Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. London. Longman Sheen, R (1994) A critical analysis of the advocacy of the task-based syllabus TESOL Quarterly, 28 (1), 127-151


T (1996) What learners know and what they need to know In J Willis and D Willis (Eds), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (pp 31-41). Oxford Heinemann

Shortall,

P (1996) Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction In J Willis and D Willis (Eds), Challenge and

Skehan,

Change

in

Language Teaching (pp 17-30) Oxford: Heinemann,

1996.

Stern, H H (1992) Issues and Options Oxford University Press

in

Language Teaching

Swan, M (1985) A critical look at the communicative approach Journal, 39 (1), 2-12 Wakao,

A

and Nelson, B

ELT

(1997) Student-produced multimedia

projects Pedagogy and practice The Language Teacher 21 (12), pp 19-26.

White, R V (1988) The ELT Curriculum: Design, Innovation and

Management Oxford Blackwell Publishers Widdowson, H G. (1990) Aspects of Language Teaching Oxford University Press (1979) The notional syllabus Does it lead to competence? Explorations m Applied Linguistics (pp. 247-250) Oxford Oxford University Press Reprinted in P Richards-Amato, Making it happen: Interaction in the second language classroom (291-294) White Plains, NY Longman

Widdowson,

H G

communicative

Wilkins, D A (1976) Notional Syllabuses Oxford University Press. Willis, D (1995) Introduction to syllabus design Lecture presented at David English House, Hiroshima, Japan August 14


Yalden,J (1983) The Communicative Syllabus: Evolution, Design and Implementation Oxford Pergamon Yalden, J (1987) The Communicative Syllabus: Evolution, Design and

Implementation

London Prentice Hall

Yamamoto-Wilson, J (1997) Can knowledge of Japanese help EFL teaching? The Language Teacher 21 (1), 6-10.

our
